dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Unknown

felelltfr,u.dIDdeIeeedto
prev~ clearlyiJmVIrranted
JDV8S1ODof~) pn.~107V.U. vacy
fllJBLICcon
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000
Washington, DC 20529
u.s.Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
EAC 05 214 50308
Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER Date: DEC 0' ~ 2007
INRE: Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced
Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2)
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER:
SELF-REPRESENTED
INSTRUCTIONS:
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office.
~
!Robert P. Wiemann, Chief
Administrative Appeals Office
www.uscis.gov
Page 2
DISCUSSION: The Director , Vermont Service Center , denied the employment-based immigrant visa petition .
The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The AAO will summaril y dismiss
the appeal.
8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(v) states, in pertinent part, "[a]n officer to whom an appeal is taken shall summarily
dismiss any appeal when the party concerned fails to identify specifically any erroneous conclusion of law or
statement offact for the appeal."
On the Form 1-290B Notice of Appeal, under "state the reason(s) for this appeal ," the petitioner stated: "see
attached appeal brief." The body of that brief reads, in full:
By decision dated September 30, 2006 The United States Citizenship and Immigration Service
(Hereinafter "Service") denied my petition 1-140 for alien worker.
After carefully consideration of Denial notice, I decided to file the appeal.
I am sure that you with particular consideration will examine my case and will reach to the
appropriate decision . In any case thank you for your hard and fruitful job.
[Sic.] The petitioner does not allege any error by the director. The petitioner does not mention , let alone contest,
the ground s for denial. The petitioner has , in effect, simply requested a re-adjudication of her petition , without
identifying any flaws in the director 's adjudication and decision.
Inasmuch as the petitioner has failed to identify specifically an erroneous conclusion of law or a statement of fact
as a basis for the appeal , the appeal must be summarily dismissed.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.